- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 253 OF 2019 MOHAMMAD MASUD ANSARI @ MANSOOR MOHAMMAD KHALID ANSARI VERSUS SHAIKH MUJAHED S/O. SHAIKH NASIB AND OTHERS Mr.Afzaal I.Shaikh h/f Mr.Zila Ul Mustafa, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.M.A.Aher, APP for the Respondent/State. ( CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. ) DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. The Applicant is challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Criminal Appeal No.48/2017 dated 23.07.2019, wherein the Appeal preferred by the Respondents/Accused persons came to be allowed and the learned Sessions Judge pleased to acquit all the accused persons for the offences punishable u/s 452, 324, 323, 506 r/w 34 of the IPC. 2. Initially, the Respondents/Accused persons were prosecuted in pursuance to the report lodged by the present Applicant. On the basis of statement of Applicant herein recorded at Government khs/Sept.2026/253 2026:BHC-AUG:41207 - 2 - Hospital, Parbhani, the offence against the accused came to be registered vide Crime No.16/2011. In the said statement, it is alleged that the Applicant is the shop owner of hardware on the Jintur Road and his father is Mutawalli of Dargha Sher Ali Shah Baba. At about 12.00 noon of 15.01.2011, the Accused came to his shop in auto rickshaw. There were certain customers present in his shop at the relevant time. The accused entered his shop and damaged the articles. The accused persons also alleged to have assaulted the informant. Thus, on the basis of allegations, the FIR came to be registered and further investigation was set into motion. 3. After filing of the charge sheet, the learned Trial Court framed charge at Exh.26 for the offence punishable u/s 452, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of the IPC. After recording the evidence, the learned Trial Court initially convicted the accused persons for the offence punishable u/s 452, 324 and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer SI for one year and to pay of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to suffer SI for one month. The accused persons were also convicted for the offence punishable u/s 323 r/w 34 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer SI for 2 months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each, khs/Sept.2026/253 - 3 - in default to suffer SI for 15 days. 4. Being aggrieved with the said conviction order, the accused persons preferred appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, which came to be registered as Criminal Appeal No.48/2017. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing the learned Advocates for the respective parties, was pleased to allow the appeal thereby acquitting the accused persons. 5. The learned Advocate for the Applicants vehemently argued that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge failed to consider the evidence in proper perspective. According to him, the prosecution has rightly established the guilt of the accused before the Trial Court. After accepting the evidence of the witnesses, the Trial Court had rightly convicted the accused persons. There was no occasion for the learned Sessions Judge to disturb the findings of the Trial Court. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is illegal and require to be quashed and set aside, thereby maintaining the order of the learned J.M.F.C. He further submits that the learned Sessions Court also did not consider the testimony of the eye witnesses khs/Sept.2026/253 - 4 - in proper perspective. He, therefore, submits that the instant criminal revision application be allowed. 6. Heard the learned APP for the Respondent/State. He supported the learned Advocate for Applicant, and reiterated that instant Criminal Revision Application be allowed thereby maintaining Trial Court’s conviction order. 7. After hearing the learned Advocates for the parties and on going through the orders passed by the Sub-ordinate Courts, it has been found that the learned Sessions Court held that the testimony of the eye witnesses does not inspire the confidence and as such, cannot be relied upon. 8. The learned Sessions Court further observed that despite there being independent witnesses, who have been examined, have not supported the case of informant. As such, it is difficult to impose conviction upon the accused persons. 9. The learned Sessions Judge further observed that although khs/Sept.2026/253 - 5 - the weapon was seized by the Investigation Officer, however, the same was not referred to the Medical Officer, so as to prove whether the injury inflicted upon the informant has been caused by the weapon. Since the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused persons, therefore the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit all the accused persons. 10. The scope of Section 397 of Cr.P.C. empowers this Court to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any order passed by an inferior Court. Such power is required to be exercised cautiously. Basically, the power is required to be exercised so that justice is done and there is no abuse of power of Court. The power could be exercised to rectify miscarriage of justice, and most sparingly that too only in appropriate cases. 11. After perusing the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Court minutely, I found that the same has been passed considering the evidence in proper perspective and requires no interference by this Court under its jurisdiction u/s 397 of the Cr.P.C. khs/Sept.2026/253 - 6 - 12. Considering the above, Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. ( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) khs/Sept.2026/253